ArticleHuman factors and ergonomics in manufacturing2021
Human Factors and Ergonomics and the management of existential threats: A work domain analysis of a COVID-19 return from lockdown restrictions system.
Article in Human factors and ergonomics in manufacturing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Human Factors Challenges on the Front Lines of Mass COVID-19 Vaccination Clinics: Human Systems Modeling Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) applications in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned and considerations for methods.Applied ergonomics · 2022Article
- Unveiling the effects of consumers' psychological distance on their reactance and related behavioral outcomes: Do lockdown restrictions matter?Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Human Factors and Ergonomics and the management of existential threats: A work domain analysis of a COVID-19 return from lockdown restrictions system.Human factors and ergonomics in manufacturing · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Following strict "lockdown" restrictions designed to control the spread of the COVID-19 virus, many jurisdictions are now engaged in a process of easing restrictions in an attempt to stimulate economic and social activity while continuing to suppress virus transmission. This is challenging and complex, and in several regions, new outbreaks have emerged. We argue that systems Human Factors and Ergonomics methods can assist in understanding and optimizing the return from lockdown. To demonstrate, we used work domain analysis to develop an abstraction hierarchy model of a generic "return from lockdown restrictions" system. The model was assessed to identify (a) issues preventing a successful return from lockdown; and (b) leverage points that could be exploited to optimize future processes. The findings show that the aim of continuing to suppress virus transmission conflicts with the aims of returning to pre-virus economic and social activity levels. As a result, many functions act against each other, ensuring that the system cannot optimally achieve all three of its primary aims. Potential leverage points include modifying the goals and rules of the system and enhancing communications and feedback. Specifically, it is argued that moderating economic aims and modifying how social and community activities are undertaken will result in longer term suppression of the virus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.